HISTORY OF IDEAS - Capitalism 

How dare one not to enjoy such masterpieces! Off with their heads!

@@matthewgillespie2835 I can hear the voice of that red queen from Alice in Wonderland.

Who doesn’t?

I am sure that North Korea still plays those programs on television if your interested in watching them

@@mrbeersinface bad sarcasm please try again

Or...child

I just imagine him telling her wife the history of capitalism as a bedtime story

Maybe that’s his secret

@@thomasdupont7186 thy name is aimiliar

@@thomasdupont7186 you came back to edit this, and it's still shit. You had a chance, and you fucked it.

If you dont think money can buy happiness, you don't know where to shop. - Dan Peña

And degenerate

Cedrick J'mack Niddle no, then you are just not a degenerate materialist

@@ece5925 I don't really think money can buy happiness, but it can give you a sense of security and opportunity, which can facilitate happiness as long as it doesn't make you greedy and corrupt you (basically if your life doesn't revolve around it). Having a lot of money doesn't necessarily make you a degenerate materialist, it's how you spend or invest or donate that money. Bill Gates donates nearly half of his income to charity. I do believe that giving to other people, whether it be your time, money, or whatever else, plays a huge role in a person's happiness and self-worth.

Because they can buy things all people should be able to afford within reason. I mean, should anyone in this day and age have enough money to buy a planet?

the problem is that, in the UK, the teachers wouldn't look any further than Das Kapital, Maynard Keynes, Marx, Gramsci, and Foucault.

@@CIMAmotor same problem everywhere

Right?

Philosophy is too abstract before university because students dont have the experience to connect to philosophy and their minds are not fully developed. Students need less abstract applications of philosophy, ie, science, history, math, literature. Marva Collins Way-Marva Collins Teaching Johnny To Think-..... ........Leonard Peikoff

I think system just want worker to do their job meet metric by the end of month. They want good employees. They don't want intellectual to understand whole process (the big picture).

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet." - Abraham Lincoln

"It's not gae if it's Ricardo" -Albert Einstein

"Being gay is kosher as long as you don't fuck a guy in the vagina." - Jesus of Nazareth

That's just made up words

"Sex is the only manifestation that's human." -Diogenes

I would say you definitely understand something better if you can make it intelligible to those less intelligent than oneself, but I don't think I don't grasp algebra because I can't teach it to my dog. Some things are just complex and simply beyond some people. It doesn't make someone less intelligent if they are able to grasp something extremely difficult but still unable to communicate that thing to someone else.

I would say, the first sentence is the first step, and the second sentence is the second step to mark the true intelligence.

The issue in this cute remark is the meaning of the word "understanding" A lot of people use that word but not a lot of people know what it really means. When I "understand" something how do you know I really did? What is this test to evaluate "understanding?" The meaning of "understanding" is ineffable and can only evaluated indirectly through behaviorist experiments. For instance one can erroneously say a child understands quadratic equations if they are able to apply the proper formula to find the value of X. However does this child really "understand" quadratic equations? Can they, for instance, describe the relationship between those equations and conic curves, or Kepler's laws or planetary motion?

Exactly my philosophy useful in developing countries

@Jay Bee non sequitur.

lmao!! ikr

yup.

Ew I thought the guy in the front was wearing pants

Bruh

Brah! That was the funniest part. I had to pause it. I was like “what hell”. Lol. They promise good time (in my Russian voice).

Karl Marx coined "Capitalism". Adam Smith preferred “commercial society.”

@Kaushik Kurudi no I’m not Gandhi. That’s not someone else.

you summarize the whole book of adam smith.

+oberstul except that the dutch east indian company was not mentioned... but whatever.

+The School of Life PLEASE STOP THE PAIN!!!!! I BEG OF YOUUUU!!!!

Not really. They didn't even bring up Ayn Rand. But that would hurt their socialist agenda.

The misconception these socialist philosophers have is they think goods being successful being on the free market represent their philosophically objective value. They do not. The works of Adam Smith will always be of more philosophically objective value than of Dance Moms. However, the success of goods on the free market represent their Socially Objective Value. This means their value to the user in the context of their life. Another example, an airplane is of greater philosophically technical achievement than a bicycle. But if your transportation needs do not exceed the needs of a bicycle than why would you buy an airplane even if you had the money? Another example. Lipstick is of less philosophically objective value than a microscope. But lipsticks socially objective value is greater to the Starbucks barista whose difference of having lipstick or not might be the difference between confidence or shame.

However, this does not mean that the socially objective value of a product is completely subjective. If a barista has enough money for lipstick but did not budget enough money for a doctor to use a microscope for a medical exam, she learns a better way of budgeting. The free market serves as a teacher. I propose that Capitalism is not only the most rational social system, but the most moral social system as well. It is only system that protects individual rights.

Wut

hahaha ....next IPhone charger sold separately lol haha

@@bsurajraju Which is why we have the saying _caveat emptor_ - let the buyer beware. Buying Apple today is a fools errand. They're way too much into their walled garden philosophy.

LoL

communism is when your power shuts down at 9 pm and you go cry to your mommy cause you had no idea that was also a part of communism. indoctrinated clown

Cus commies are more ideological

@@shamusson and your not clearly lol

@@ghastlyghandi4301 sure am

That’s a tragedy

Hey I can't seem to find the communism one - would you mind sharing the link? Much appreciated!

@Chris Sain Prices go down as well as up 🤷‍♂️

@Tenebris Lupus ye he was a kgb agent tf do we expect

+randy109 you are right... one can argue that every concept is as evil as the people taking advantage of it... one question, since im no expert and i would like an opinion in that matter, why dont we use a credit system instead of monetary?!

+randy109 our use of a profit based, "growth" driven monetary system has become one of the greatest destroyers of the natural world and sustainable human values. The entire global economy requires "cyclical consumption" to operate, which means that money must constantly be circulating. Thus, new goods and services must be constantly introduced regardless of the state of the environment and actual human necessity. This "perpetual" approach has a fatal flaw for resources as we know it are simply not infinite. Resources are finite and the Earth is essentially a closed system. To assume the need for constant consumption to keep people employed and hence the market system going is eco-cidal on a finite planet. The true goal of an economy, by definition, is to strategically preserve and create efficiency. The system today demands the opposite.

+randy109 No, ignorance is the root of all evil.

+randy109 There has existed societies that have fared well without money.

Erik Le Blanc Pleym now it is prey to societies with money. it's on a dinner plate.

Just do it. I am looking forward to listen to the first songs 😀

@@souranis bad credit. Can't get a lone from the money lenders

@@brettwyatt7165 loan*

I’d expect the songs to be calling out commercialization of religion

*lenders

I always thought that particular Politician/Philosopher to be overly pedantic, pestiferous, and verbose in a supercilious way, personally.

That's so true, the opposing side is so stupid and mean for supporting this ideology, as they believe it will enhance and prosper the lives of his family and community 😂😂😂 So instead of having compassionate conversation with them, i will make both of us suffer in a cycle of fighting 🧠

I needed to read this lol

a short answer to: What is confirmation bias? :)

*Insert George Orwell quote here* -Argument won

exactly. Also usury is not a moral way to engage in capitalism.

In that culture, temples were a place where money was safe. But the Christian hatred of life included money.

@@senorstrangelov There is no such fact as usury. There is only voluntary and mutually selfish agreement between lender and borrower because, in their independent judgments, the loan benefits their life. Morality is a guide to life, not to the sacrifice of life. Sacrifice is morally depraved, death-worship.

@@TeaParty1776 negative. Temples were and are a place of worship. This is a round about way of hating on Christianity. Anyone with a brain can see that.

@@senorstrangelov Your mystical ideal is not about the historical reality of temples as safe places for money. Christianity, like all religion, is immoral. It is death-worship and life-hatred. It is hatred of mans mind focused onto concrete reality. It is retreat into a fantasy in which self-responsibility is not needed because "God" will take care of you. This is not roundabout. Christianity is evil. Morality is a guide to life and happiness here in the material universe.

+The School of Life I want to add also once you have subs in english the next step is to have it in other lengages. I'm from Argentina (spanish speaking) and it would be very helpful because most of the people don't know english and also it would be easier even if you know. Thanks for your videos. they are very helpful.

This video was biased and wrong in so many ways. It is amazing you are so ignorant.

Bigdawgphilleep It's up to a person what kind of path he decides to take in his life. Taking one aimed towards becoming a businessman yourself is not easier than the road of becoming asomeone's employee. But in the end capitalism creates work for everyone and is aimed to please society's demands. What better system would you propose? I'd say that the real issue is that people just have tendency of getting pampered, life is just not as easy as a fairy tale.

Bigdawgphilleep Excuse me for my ignorance, but about what political favors are you talking about? Using life as commodity, disposing when not needed anymore - what are you talking about, assasinating employees after they can't do the work anymore? I think you're just exaggerating what happens when someone gets to point of getting fired from his job. In which way do you see it as "disposal"? More like something what happens when business is doing terribly to point that there is no other choice but to start cutting expenses as much as possible. Could you enlighten me also about how does capitalism kills those refusing to participate in it?

+pRopaaNS 1) It's up to a person what kind of path he decides to take in his life: But a person's path is also decided by the wealth of that person's parents, the country in which they were born, the gender and race they are, and a whole host of other variables. Capitalism does not by any means makes things 'fair.' 2) Capitalism creates work for everyone: That's not a good thing. Work for the vast majority of those who live in the capitalist world is dull, repetitive, and uncreative. A better system would give wealth straight to the people without such soul-crushing demands - we certainly have enough resources and automation to do so, especially since we could eliminate useless work that creates no real value, yet is maintained because of the capitalist-created, arbitrary connection between labour and the right to eat and sleep under a roof. 3) Capitalism is aimed to please society's demands: Only to the extent that pleasing these demands is profitable for the capitalist. Its primary purpose is to make profit for the capitalist. 4) Life is just not as easy as a fairy tale: You're not wrong. But it's not a valid ethical judgement because it says IS, not SHOULD. We have enough resources and our production is automated sufficiently to provide the entire world with a much higher standard of living than most experience right now, so why should we shackle ourselves to what IS? Certainly capitalists did not have qualms about overturning feudalism because "that's just the way it IS." If humanity needs hardship, why shouldn't we return to a hunter-gatherer way of life? And why don't we engineer hardship in a way such that people have to give their consent to experience it, rather than have poverty and wage slavery forced upon them?

+pRopaaNS It's like democracy, most people want it, but most are too stupid for the system.

***** 1) I disagree. Indeed people around influences a person and perhabs in many cases strives him to take certain paths in his life, but in the end that person decides himself, even if he doesn't realize that. Taking a path carved for you by others is still your path and your choice, because too much pressure can make a person to decide otherwise and refuse that path people keep pushing him for. 2) The dull boring work is also the easiest one to do. To get more exciting and interesting work better education is neccesary. Many people might not be all there for carving their future when going to school and university but be forced there by people around them, but in the end it's their choice whenever to take studies seriously or not and become a routhine worker in some factory. 3) Capitalist don't get all of the profit in his own pocket. All of the profit made by company must be invested to further expand and improve the comapny, stuffing the money in your own pocket is illegal addording to law. He can only give himself money what he formalizes as his own salary. 4) I don't disagree, but I don't like when people complains an stays negative in face of having great opportunities and resources. Negativity is useful to extent of keeping expectations in the right place, so you can apprechiate when things go better than expected. Expanding negativity towards your outwards view on the world while keeping expectactions overly positive is not going to end well for you. Never beign satisfied, nothing is as good as you'd like it to be.. Why do you have to torture yourself? I don't. I think that the life is fine, because the reality is better than my expectatctions inside. That's why I say that life is not fairy tale, to remind myself that I'm not taking an acid trip and to place my feet on reality as it is.

yeeter, right-on but Marx's issue with capitalism was with time, it would save, enrich and eventually impoverish workers. The firsts two industrial revolutions are good examples, as well as the 80's for the West who's working class used debt (money lenders) to maintain their quality of life. Brexit and then Trump is 2016 version. When democracy falls in the West, will Karl have the last laugh?

@M33ble Brexit for the people by the people? The promises that won those votes came to as much fruition as repealing Obama Care, building the Wall, getting tough on China etc.... which all led to catastrophic economic losses. Outside the EU, who exactly was Britain going to trade its surplus output with, and if they were allowed to trade within the EU, at what additional costs? As a small business exporter (multinationals just borrow money made out of thin air (The Fed)), would those additional costs make you noncompetitive in nearly all foreign markets? The icing on the cake is these state crippling issues have yet to be resolved on either side of the pond. Are we getting the picture that low info voters can be dangerous to Democracy? Better yet, there is a 2500 year book that can explain it much better: "The Republic" by Plato.

Exactly bro. Just don't be poor, it's that easy. As the most intelluctually talented philosopher of the western world, Ben 'The Destroyer' Shapiro debunks a common concern raised by climate activists. "Where will I live when the sea levels rise and my house gets flooded?" Ben 'The Destroyer' Shapiro solves, in his answer, the easy solution not only to this particular problem but also every single complaign about capitalism and poverty in general. Ben 'Mega-Brain' Shapiro states "You don't think the people will simply sell their houses if the sea level rise?" And I think that this can be generalised further: Why don't poor people don't just sell stuff, open up a business or get good education so they can have a good job? It's honestly that easy! I think it is because they actually 'like' to be poor. They don't do shit about it, because, if they would become wealthy, it would prove that capitalism is in fact the single best ideology on our planet. They, however, want to keep their revolutionary beliefs and leftist ideals, and will also for that reason, in fact, stay poor and throw their lifes away. Checkmate.

@@lulla8312 lol thats the only argument any libtard neckbeard communists have against Ben shapiro.

​@@lulla8312 so people with wealth doesn't deserve their wealth?? they were just too lucky risking their money and working on their businesses for soo long. it is not easy to get wealthy but capitalism makes it that if u work hard enough u will make it

Hahahaha X”D

Hahahahahahaha

What are you on about?

@@yoyoman_blue6485 the guy in 5:35

I think Samuel Pickwick, a character from one of Charles Dickens' books.

😂

pigslave3 It's the original "How it's Made"

it sounds about as exciting as American midwestern and southern culture

what?

"keeping up with the Kardashians" is the real deal

A pity all the comments seem to be under those persuasions.

blindly following an ideology is harmfull. It doesnt matter what ideology it is

Yeah unfortunately you are often labelled as a communist or a Marxist if you don't blindly follow capitalism

+Ian Blasso Most people cannot differentiate between criticism and rejection

A lot of people think that their systems are all one or all another without realising just how blended they can get. One might live in a highly capitalistic society, but if you pay taxes that keep the street lights on or the get the bins collected, well, you've got elements of socialism in your country. The problems with each system are mostly due to the depth of their implementation, not just implementing them at all.

Yep, only state propaganda about how the state knows best ... And tractors

@@PysKa.512 cringe

I would love that

No...if we ditch capitalism you will starve. But he fails to make that point.

In Capitalism there is only the owner and the Employee. Ultimately, the 'Employee' makes the products, takes those products to the market, sells the same products, he made, to himself and finally he pays a fee known as Profit to some 'Owner' for a permission to own the same products he made and sold to himself. The owner gets to collect profit for doing nothing.....and many call that 'earning' instead of 'taking'.

#liberalism

Sounds like the inverse of "Our needs are our wants".

Do what you want with your money Frank but you won't last longer than 3 days without water

well, gee, I guess the 2008 crash of Wall Street and financial crisis is my fault then. Fuck Hayek

@@DKazzix the 2008 crash of Wall Street and financial crisis was caused by government investment in non-sustainable markets, which leads to economic booms at first and then extreme busts at the end.

@@mr.e2962 Yeah nothing to do with how capitalism has literally always worked.... governments, oligopolies or monopolies etc. are everywhere and yet idiot libertarians pretend there's ever been or ever will be a "free" market. Right next to the slave markets I suppose...

@@0NoFreeWill0 you do understand that goverment involvement is the basis of socialism though...

@@geol5448 Common ownership of the means of production is socialism. Government involvements in markets are like, the actual basis of capitalism even existing. Capitalism and the modern industrial nation-state are basically coextensive. If the government launching foreign wars to secure energy resources and cheap labor (slaves, oil, etc.) wasn't happening capitalism would cease to function. Not to mention the primitive accumulation (stealing land) that was supported by the government that got everything started.

Unfortunately, whoever makes these videos doesn't have any grasp of capitalism.

He's a mediocre IGNORANT so don't care about it....

>Friedman oh no no no.... >chile WHEEEEEEZZEEE

@@FR0980Y because this specific video doesn't contain all of what capitalism is. There's a reason they have OTHER videos.

@@marka3122 Perhaps you're correct. I just rewatched the video and my assessment wasn't completely accurate. It's not so much their knowledge of capitalism that's lacking. My issue is more with the implications the video makes. The problems that it details, and many others espouse, also happen to be the very reason why capitalism is so successful. They can't be divorced from each other. The experimental nature of capitalism is precisely why it works. No one can really predict whether something like smart watches will be a revolutionary invention until it's tried in the market. Turns out that they aren't really all that useful but hindsight is 20/20. I was alive when home computers were considered by people, who pretended to be in the know, to be just a fad that would die out soon. Nothing of any real practical use. Had central planners control over what products and services could be offered to the masses, we might live in a completely different world. As for child labor, harsh working conditions and "exploitation of labor", many people of today, yesterday and forever socialists, always make the mistake of looking at the past through the rose-colored lens of the modern day. They also mistakenly view events as snapshots in time as opposed to its full context. Slavery was an institution from the beginning of time until very recently. Child labor also always existed as well. The wealth creation and economic gains of capitalism is the one and only reason why these things have been removed from society. If children still needed to work in order for people to not starve to death, no one would think twice about it. It's only when we became wealthy enough that there was virtually no place for children in the workforce that we got rid of it. Many nations still haven't reached that point yet but they will soon. And when they do, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that they do the same exact thing we did: outlaw child labor. Unless the world totally fraks things up, we'll see a world without legal child labor very soon (50-100 years). Freedom and capitalism is and has quickly improved the world. We would be so much worse off without them. I just hope that we keep moving forward.

This was a terrible video, you must not know much about history. This video claims to be a history of capitalism and it did nothing to tell that history. It didn't mention how civilization transitioned thru various economies as it transitioned thru various methods of organizing a nation state.

U need money to buy the coffee though

Thank you. You can't have capitalism with central banking and monopolies over the production of monies.

Capitalism is a system designed to take money away from productive working people and give it to a tiny few who do nothing so they can have mansions and yachts. It does that REALLY well. If it didn't have the tools you listed it would find other tools (like paying government officials for beneficial results) to achieve the same goal.

@@TheGroovyJones How are those "tiny few" getting that money?

@@matrixman8582 they get it by making people work and paying them enough to keep them alive and working, then selling the products of their work for more money. Sorry i know this is an old comment

@@matiasgarciacasas558 How are they able to pay them?

Thank you. Lovely comment

@@vexling111 Hello Casper. Thank you for reading! Stay safe :- )

That's why malthus is right at some aspect, balancing what we already have, and the Austrian economists

No civilization has ever gone extinct because of too much sensibility. I’m thinking sensibility means rational here.

@@gking407 I mean the greeks

There is a staggeringly important lesson nested inside that... Complicated, bitter but obscure truths can and will endure in the heart of the common populace, but once enough people can't get whatever it is they consider important, then the shit truly hits the fan.

They also did women’s rights, free childcare and recycled cars.

@@dirkscott5410 Sure, I never claimed the totalitarian regimes running the communist bloc countries were the epitomy of evil. But I strongly disagree with any government that censors people who speak against the interests of the state.

caffeine is a hell of a drug

That's how it goes, people will take it and take it, endure the systemic decay and the worsening of the overall conditions, until one day something trivial like coffee or something trite in comparison to the overall issues that people aren't reacting to, will spark a volcanic eruption of dissent.

right!

I have a tiny guess that you guys probably are Republicans :)

Krunk Classic lol, does it matter? Democrats or republicans, don't we just want to state facts?

Solomon Chang: I just find it funny how the majority of American Christians support the Republican party like they're in some sort of denial of who and what Jesus really represented. That was more my point to it :)

Krunk Classic so what do you think Jesus represented?

Yes but at that point in time, the capitalism that was being practiced in Venice did not involve any factories and certainly not to the extent of the UK at that time.

@fabian michelsson Venice was brought up as an example of what that one guy thought money should be spent on instead of frivolous tchotchke. The channel isn't a detractor or critic, its doing a *history* of capitalism. Pretty defensive there (1930) what do you have to be (2008) so defensive about?

Venice was built on being terrified of the Huns.

No, Venice was not built on proto-capitalism. Proto-capitalism started in Great Britain with agrarian capitalism which was precipitated by Locke’s new definition of private property and the creation of vast spaces of enclosures which destroyed the commons (lands for common use) upon which much of the peasant class required to farm and hunt. Renaissance Florence and Venice were not proto-capitalist economies.

@fabian michelsson Capitalism is not the natural culmination of history. Mercantilism is not an early form of capitalism. There are no early forms of capitalism. Capitalism represents a historically specific social form and a historic rupture with earlier forms. “Vastly successful commercial city-states like Florence [and Venice] did not give rise to capitalism, while capitalism did emerge in England, whose cities, in the context of a precociously centralized monarchical state, were arguably among the least autonomous in Europe.” -Ellen Meiksins Wood “The critical factor in the divergence of capitalism from all other forms of ‘commercial society’ was the development of certain social property relations that generated market imperatives and capitalist ‘laws of motion’, which imposed themselves on production. The great non-capitalist commercial powers had producing classes and especially peasants who remained in possession of their means of subsistence, and land in particular. They were ruled and exploited by dominant classes and states that relied on ‘extra-economic’ appropriation or ‘politically constituted property’ of various kinds. These great civilizations were not systematically subjected to the pressures of competitive production and profit-maximization, the compulsion to reinvest surpluses, and the relentless need to improve labour-productivity associated with capitalism.” -Ellen Meiksins Wood “Capitalism is a system in which goods and services, down to the most basic necessities of life, are produced for profitable exchange, where even human labour-power is a commodity for sale in the market, and where all economic actors are dependent on the market. This is true not only of workers, who must sell their labour-power for a wage, but also of capitalists, who depend on the market to buy their inputs, including labour-power, and to sell their output for profit. Capitalism differs from other social forms because producers depend on the market for access to the means of production (unlike, for instance, peasants, who remain in direct, non-market possession of land); while appropriators cannot rely on ‘extra-economic’ powers of appropriation by means of direct coercion - such as the military, political, and judicial powers that enable feudal lords to extract surplus labour from peasants - but must depend on the purely ‘economic’ mechanisms of the market. ” Ellen Meiksins Wood, The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View

So many books are like that outside of economic literatures

@@inigobantok1579 tell us a few, perhaps we can read them

@@jaidevphadke9293 peppa pig's countdown to bedtime

@@jaidevphadke9293 the last wish

@@jaidevphadke9293 the story about aliens I wrote when I was 6

Damn, thank you for this quote.

@KAOS NATION In Germany, we refer to what you are proposing as 'Social Democracy' and it's embedded in our constitution.

monopoly its not the name,because monopoly cant exist in a free market, byou mean Big companies, that also means faster production and lower cost, which means lower prices so actually it helps people, they are saving money that now they can spend in some other product helping another shop to grow. And the only way monopoly exist is because of the state and its regulations that always are better for minorities. with free markets, monopolys doesnt exist, its just how everything evolve, and if you think about it "monopolys" or big companies are the one that give us Computers and vaccinations, also industrial revolution. So Capitalism is the way the human keeps evolving, now using his mind to keep the wheel spining.

@KAOS NATION you drank the american capitalist koolaid . I suggest you read the writings of the man who actually first coined the word in an economic treatise - Marx, and stop listening to right wing propaganda which you have done a great job of explaining. Capitalism has always been an oppressive system, commerce is the free market.

KAOS NATION Can you explain what is pure capitalism? You mean a market without regulation and without politics? Like when URSS switch to capitalism you know how that turn? Their worse economical crisis, mafia was everywhere and control the whole market. "Capitalism" started to work only when government started to implement regulations. And I like how you refer the early 1900’ saying it was its purest form of capitalism while ending up with its worst financial crisis ever. Kinda fail And don’t forget that it’s actually because of the two world war that USA (and all the other to this very day) is that much of a super power

When they die

I'm imagining Allain de Botton delivering this as a public lecture and this being the first question from the audience during the Q &A session. Lol

I wonder how much money they put into the marketing machinery to promote their channel against the sea of competition in this gladiator arena.

Nice…sentence…structure…

Its an appeal to emotion. See Ayn Rand's, _Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal_, for a principled, systematic view, w/definitions.

...and how Fuedalism and merchantilism were completely avoided. Those are critical policies that transcends the reasons for Capitalism.

Arthur Smile : Almost everyone gets richer, a small few much more than everyone else. How's that?

@@Savage_Squirrel from a practical (non-theoretical) point of view, you just defined communism.

@@ArthurBrooklyn you literally dont know what communism is then lol

He wrote about the bourgeois, while acting like one himself

@@stroodlepup how in any manner was Karl Marx one of the bourgeois . he lived in dept until a communist bourgeois helped him out . but in no other manner was he a traitor to his own class .

Ali Al Rida Hammoud And even if he was a part of the bourgeois, that doesn’t invalidate his criticisms against the system. You can criticize an oppressive system even if you’re in a position to benefit, something right wingers don’t understand

@@stroodlepup You a full of... In what way he was acting like a bourgeois?! 🙄

Donn Jeferson Atienza Consider free education to relearn history *But wait, free education is a idea created by Karl Marx*

Flaw 1: I think you're right, that generally people are not forced to work and that job opportunities, even low-paying ones, are better than no opportunity at all. I think what irks workers is seeing the fruits of their labour being sold for dozens if not hundreds of times more than they're being paid for their labour. Now, you might say that there's no coercion or trickery in that, after all, they should have known that going in but the fact remains that people will feel unjustly treated even if those feelings aren't strictly rational. The central point is that extreme inequality makes people feel like the system is unfair. Now, you might say that's irrational, but I'd say to you that treating highly evolved apes like strictly rational creatures is irrational. If you zoom out a lot, here's what people see: extremely low-paid workers manufacturing the very items that are being sold to make record-breaking profits. When viewed from this height I think it's easy to understand why people have problems. Flaw 2: I think I see the same problem in this flaw as in the previous one: again, you seem to want treat people as though they were rational agents. If people want to spend their money on heroin, why not? If people want to spend their money on unhealthy sugary/salty/fatty foods, why not? If people want to spend their money on superficialities made to cover-up their physical flaws, then why not? Expensive cars to buttress their masculinity? Rare earth gems to heal their spirit? The point is that if you raise people in an environment where distractions, unhealthy foods, addictive substances, and psychological crutches are prevalent you're going to get a bunch of fat addicted sickly people with tons of psychological issues (that sounds like a pretty accurate description of many people in the west, no?). Now, SOME of those people might still have enough self-control and reason to make it through unscathed, but they will increasingly be the minority. If people were taught self-control and emotional-regulation in school then maybe I'd be ok with a world like that, but as it is, they're not. And huge corporations know it. They know our insecurities. They know our cravings. They know what makes us feel comfort and anger, and many of them are without qualms in targeting those human qualities to turn a profit. I think it's hard to know "what's good for us" and I hate the idea of some committee of self-important people deciding what's best for all us stupid apes. I definitely think that should be avoided, but on the other hand it's obvious to me that politicians and corporations understand human nature so well these days that they're able to use our shortcomings to their benefit. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I don't think the system should treat people like they're rational and free - they're not. We're highly emotional and irrational creatures with a tendency to make mistakes, a limited capacity to understand, and subject to all sorts of biases. Why not have a system that brings out the best in us, rather than exploit the worst in us?

He's spitting straight fax

@@janpetrykowski4794 Yes, but bringing out the "best in us" was covered in the video. It failed because people wanted coffee... It will always fail because people will always want coffee and chips and stuff like that. The system shouldn't mandate what we can buy. It should help us understand and become less emotional and irrational creatures as you said. There is no other way. Keeping all these shortcomings and somehow still living in a healthy world can't be done. No government can force that. It can only show us the path we have to take ourselves. We have to change by our own will. The Government can't force it. It can try, but it can't work.

You seem to live in a fantastic world

Best comment I've read on this video

You can do this in a socialist and/or communist system too bruv. Look at Yugoslavia for example.

I never even noticed

A true test of darwinism

Darwinism is expecting the wrong answers & then coming forth thinking you have something

Yeah I'm surprised to find that out! Potable water isn't available to drink freely out of taps here, but water is always the cheapest drink you can get anywhere! It's crazy to think how soda is somehow cheaper than plain water.

I guess that depends on where you live? Potable tap water is free where I live in the United States. Bottles of water are 2/ $1.59 at convenience stores.

Not necessarily

@@alenpaul2523 yes its a fact if u spend something thats from there companies earn who i turn pays you back

Alen Paul - No, necessarily.

ray dalio!

krishna kanth yes thanks for catching the reference

the london industry didnt grew because of the colonies lol how would that work?

@@pedronabais1456 taxation and exploitation of resources

@@__-ls4vk pretty sure britain lost money on the colonies no? either wya the bulk of the money came from the reaosns listed in the vid

There is no "main reason". Want it or not, capitalism allows for economies to grow. Not saying is perfect, or that there is no poberty or explotation, but we just need to accept this truth.

​@@PandasUncle Britain wasn't thinking short term with their plans. There's a reason the US has conflict mineral policies. The industries that were setup by the imperialistic powers last century (such as the diamond industry) were built to extract resources and build dependence. That's why you'll see so much corruption in the continent of Africa. The leaders were planted with connections from foreign countries who helped to build the infrastructure and were funded by outside countries to restrict the flow of resources to certain countries. Just look at what happened in Nicaragua as well... funding from outside countries destroyed any hope of building free enterprise during that time. Not shifting any blame away from the leader's of these countries but there were outside pressures and going against them back then was not a good idea - especially if you did not have a strong military.

It's only common sense, which mustn't so common since you're lacking

its called Google..You can check instead of just believing what you read or hear..

Rackets lol and everything you find on google is accurate

Understanding the economic systems doesn’t take expertise. It’s pretty basic. And when you talk about the differences that’s all you need.

Go to Wannsee, between Berlin and Potsdam - goes on every Summer. It's also the place where the Nazis planned their 'Final Solution'.

@@dexstewart2450 sounds good

I will sell you a ticket for 40 dollars

Yes, a nice ass. I spot it too😂👍

he may use his di*ks to hit the volleyball, it's a skill

The biggest flaw of capitalism is the need for a focused mind. With socialism and fascism, you can evade focusing and wait to be told what to do.

well said

In a poor capitalist country you wait for bread In a rich capitalist country bread waits for you In a poor socialist country you wait for bread in a rich capitalist country bread waits for you

Be rich or be a socialist

you can also have a good life without being rich, ever thought about that option?

Patrick Van Gelder what if you get cancer? Then you are fucking broke

Hahaha I love this - what in your eyes is the dangerous idea?

@Darío Puertas good guess, but it was capitalism..

Got em

because of the boatload of gold the conquistadors returned to spain, and they didn't exactly understand inflation.

Bruh, colonization didn't really make much money at all. In fact, when Britain was debating whether to give autonomy to India, a British economist calculated Britain was actually losing money by keeping India.

+william hopper That was towards the end of colonization when Britain had drained all of it's wealth fighting the wars and also caused a famine in India.Churchill didn't care much.India was a pool which provided more than 2 million soldiers to the allies to fight the axis nations. A very little known fact.

At risk of sounding like a traitor that brings shame to my ancestors, I was born in Hong Kong and I can't quite imagine what this city would be like in my lifetime if it weren't for the British's colonization.

Ikr the bias is real

@@DanielNyong becoz capitalism is BAD Truth be truth

@@Sooyush capitalism is bad? Lol Says the guy using RU-vid On his android/apple phone With picture in his designer clothes... What a hypocrite. If you want socialim or communism go ahead and donate your salary to the government. You can do it on the treasury website.

@@Jack-xy4fy Capitalism is selling of innovation, not creation. All the sciences weren't developed for a grant money. There's a thing called passion. I agree communism is so ideal that it cuts out necessities, which lack innovation. But not passion. So, capitalism is like having a gun to your head to get your work done, while communism says, take your time, live your life. I hope you'll read to respond not react. And by the way, Trump got impeached.

@@Sooyush Suyash K Kishore firstly, I know what capitalism is, so why did you explain it to me? At what point did I mention inventing anything? You still bought expensive products rather than buying a cheap locally made item, so you yourself are reaping the benefits of capitalism whilst saying its "bad"... That is why you are a hypocrite. Secondly if the iPhone was made for passion then why are apple multibillionaires and why are they not producing new innovations and rather just sticking other people's new innovations on their product... Oh that's right because it has nothing to do with passion and everything to do with keeping the market share.. Take your time, live your life? Lol and if everyone does that then their is no innovation, just look at how little innovation comes from communist countries compared to capitalist. Finally I'm not American, so your ignorance couldn't be more clear than right now when you not only assume I'm a trump supporter, but assumed I'm American and also assumed that I'd even give a shit what you say about him. ...hillary clinton is nothing more than Bill clintons seamen recepticle and Obama only got into office because he is black and people felt obligated to vote for him to feel less guilty about being white in America 🤷‍♂️

What do you think those kids would be doing in Bangladesh if they weren't working at the shirt factory.

Capitalists only allocate capital, they don't think about goods/cost/wages as goals, they need a return on capital. If this is achieved trough production, then the costs should be minimal and price maximal, to earn the most from the deployed capital. This is balanced by the free market, that prevents monopolistic pricing. If no competition exists, prices will go up and capitalism will degenerate into crony capitalism. That's why "free market" is required to push down profit margins and prices. No free market = no good prices = poor country.

@@freefaler Like I said, this is what capitalism means now, which is also the reason so many people actively boycott such companies that are acting against the morals of society for their profit. A real capitalist would know their real capital is their workforce, and also their reputation, which is why certain brands are renowned for quality products and high wages. As for those 'allocating capital'...well. They call themselves capitalists, because they attempt to mask their real nature. They fooled you, at least.

@@andrew3203 I have to disagree. Workforce comes and goes easily, I hardly find it imperative for anyone to put half their mind on it, for the sake of profits. I mean, I surely wouldn't wage and accommodate a janitor like I would a supervisor. It's underserving, and a waste of capital. And brands like apple, gucci, etc, might cash in in the thousands of dollars just because of their brands. But any man with half a brain would know that the price is outrageous, their products inferior and a hassle to use, and you can find better items with lower prices. They're cashing in on the stupidity of others with their brand names. Sure, maybe cheap products are made with questionable ethics and against society's morals, but surely you can't expect people with minimum wage to spend more money to buy 'reputations', to satisfy their 'morals', while they're struggling everyday. Capitalism is profit oriented, and that's fair game. It's not their fault if they decided to make use of any means available. That is why we have laws.

@@Rellikan growing food and going to school

agreed

+The Hunt for Red May Right? Most only know what came out of it.. like the Holocaust and Planned Parenthood...ehem

nanomantube Eugenics has a long (and rather dark) history in the US and Canada too. Unfortunately the topic is often reduced to one of historys biggest crimes.

All the way back to Sparta. And before. Eugenics can be seen in a grey light, not just a horrible one

GentleEsther exactly

Tractor production on channel 1 had more viewers..

You a simp

It was biased, The pictures in the front could be from capitalism as much as socialism. The lie about Soviet expansionism was in other videos in the series as if capitalism competed directly with socialism is a lie. The Soviet let the foreign fighters fight their own wars. Though the real solutions like democratic worker owned cooperatives is not mentioned. That is very disappointing.

Yes. A pity his video on Marxism was entirely focused on its strengths.

Peter Marendy Yes, it's true. That video was quited biased tho. At least this one is balanced. I think it's better to mention the advantages and the disadvantages of any idea.

But he was talking about Marxism in theory, not what actually happens, but he still managed to tell that most Marxist ideals turned to be the worst dictatorships (or the best, depends on who sees it)

Compared to the Communist video, this one is heavily biased...half the video was more anti-capitalism than anything while the Communism video merely states that it had a fatal flaw yet still raved about how great it was.

because that’s communism

Exactly. Abundance not scarcity. Trickle UP economics. Human-centered capitalism that puts people before profits, always. And include everyone in a healthy econ-system. Those who are retired, disabled, going to school full-time, stay-at-home moms, artists, basically all the "others" whose lives we assign no value, or as only having potential value, which wil be evident once they are willing to exploit themselves serving food to strangers for $7/hour. It is a slap in the face, bringing someone food for starvation wages. "THAT is all you are worth woman, now smile and make nice if you want this two dollar tip." The good news is: UBI. We don't all have to contribute and receive value in the same way. Andrew Yang's book explains it better than I can, based on facts and common sense: "The War on Normal People." Elon Musk, Billl Gates, MLK Jr all came out in public support of UBI.

I agree. If there is a minimum wage there should be a maximum wage. Otherwise dont put any limits or "requirements" on wage.

@@imagin.e.ternity minimum wage is essential if we are not to go back to slavery. But no maximum yearly earnings, in capitalism (=that is never ending accumulation of capital in $ and commodities) leads to the "1% owning 50/60/80/90% (i don't really know the numbers) of global wealth" phenomenon

The problem is it's easier to prove someone is getting a minimum wage, and harder to prove someone has exceeded a maximum wage. Look at Putin. He's rumored to be worth tends of billions of dollars that are undisclosed. Unfortunately, what probably would happen is politicians + intelligence agencies would have immense power over the world's wealth (likely becoming the richest people in their nations), and that effect would likely be worse than investment-capitalism.

you think you're better than us or something ?! Twerking is the best fuck you !

Hey, it’s already 2 million views bro.

3 months ago it wasn't tho..😅 i guess due to lockdown

sometimes i do twerk videos with my dad (check my channel and leave a comment and a like guys). It's a very good way to stay healthy actually.

Thomas Dupont *Delete this Now*

Presuming to know Jesus? How do we know he wasn't against Exploitation and Extortion ... two tenets of unregulated Capitalism.

DUDAH You really blame impoverished parents rather than the system? They have to put food on the table.

@DUDAH thank you!!! Someone said it. Also let's not forget how immoral the other option is. Socialism is theft. Theft was never advocated by jesus. Socialism is theft because it forcefully takes money or even private property from one person and gives it to someone who had not worked for it in the name of "equality". That's just theft, no other way of looking at it, it's theft and stealing is a sin.

@@omkhetz3798 Alright guys, you really wanna go? Okay... 1) I grew up in the service economy. I've worked in Hollywood, I've seen the lifestyle of the .01%, the billionaire class. Below them, an invisible majority live in poverty. I can safely say that the USA is a third-world country, with a first-world aristocratic class. Hollywood and the media industry are the marketing campaign to hide these truths from the rest of society. 2) Yuppies do not have it "easy" when they spend their entire life in debt slavery, paying off loans, going bankrupt from medical emergencies. Only the wealthy have it easy in America. 3) @DUDAH You can only tell someone they "don't know economics" if you understand the fundamentals of capital, labor, use value, exchange value, surplus value, artificial scarcity, etc., better than others. Based on your comment, I'm doubtful of that, but maybe you can change my mind. 4) The "socialism is theft" claim just demonstrates an embarrassing lack of historical understanding. In 1797, Thomas Paine wrote "Agrarian Justice." Be careful... if you guys read it, your brains might explode when you realize that one of America's most influential founding fathers during the Revolutionary War was, by your standards, a "socialist."

@@AlessioMorello anecdotal opinion is invalid. First of all, the USA has better wages, better standard of living, better quality of healthcare, low prices for great products, most businesses, most amount of millionaires and the most innovation on earth. Your anecdotal evidence shows the incompetence of the liberal Californian government with its over regulation, high taxes and bad social programs. California is the most Socialist state in America except maybe for new York or Vermont. It shows how Socialism doesn't work. Compare California it the much more free market freedom loving texas, both have similar populations, similar climates, similar geography, similar latino-american culture, the one thing that is completely different is it's economic development. Texas has no state taxes, less regulation, less state run programmes, cheaper products, cheaper housing, Texas is more free market. You go to Texas and you see an abundance of things that would be considered a luxury in California. Things like 3 bedroom housing with a front yard and a garden with a swimming pool is common. That's the free market. The issue of wealth inequality isn't a bad thing. Let's say there are 10 people in a room and they all have $10. 1 of the 10 people decide to write a book and decide to sell it for $1. 5 of the 10 people decide to buy the book. Now the author has 5 customers all willing to pay $1 for the book. the author now has $15, 5 people have $9, and 4 people have $10. No immorality was done but look, there's inequality. It's not an injustice.

+Guten economically in the long run = logically and fairly

Capitalism is voluntary exchange- slavery is not.

as long as sense (and meaning) in life is given by money (capital), we're f····d. And yes, Capitalism is voluntary exchange, but as long as it gets any profit. If slavery would get you any profit, it could be considered then (as logical and even as fair). In fact, regarding actual exploitation and general world poverty, I don't think we're very far from a form of slavery. That's why is so dangerous a claim such as Locke's who wanted that Poetry was not taught anymore in schools... because it was not practical enough (that is, because you cannot make money out of it).

I completely agree, there are masses of individuals across the globe who only partake in their line of employment because they have no other choice due to extremely low living conditions.

If it didn't create profit there would be no incentive for the producer to produce.

***** though I do in fact believe that capitalism and our government is a blessing from God, despite how our society today might have fallen into a rut for many different reasons We can't blame God for our misdoings

***** you took part of the scripture reference out, it starts with "Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it into a den of thieves" (Mark 11:17) and also "...My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it into a den of thieves." (Luke 19:46) In John 2:16 Christ said "...Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise. Money is very much the subject of Christ's scrutiny of the dealers and sellers, but he emphasizes that is not the place to do it, not the fact that they are really selling it. He calls them thieves probably because He understood that they were probably ripping off the common people for their prices. These merchants valued their living and the money they would earn over that which is holy to the Lord.

Hunter N Another american saying they are the greatest.Its pretty much the breeding ground for capitalism.Low wages,Bad conditions,Workers treated poorly and a goverment that cant even provide its citazins with internantional healthcare.And your constitution is already being broken by your own goverment

***** all you gotta do is leave the verses and I'd like to read them, conversation leads to enlightenment so please

These are all very good examples you have shown me concerning riches and the system of capitalism. To be straightforward, if I wasn't in the firstplace ever, I believe that Christ condemns greed itself. All the examples show Christ stating or his apostles that money and riches and worldly things aught not to held in greed and used for selfish purpose. I do believe that God and Christ have it in Them that they very much want us to be successful in our doings and living. But when the element of greed comes into the equation, money and our wordly possessions destroy us and the people in our lives, despite the illusion that we are better off with our pockets heavy and bellies full. God does not condemn those who are making a successful living, only those who ignore the people less fortunate than them who have less to live on. Capitalism is not to blame, but the people who run the system. That's all history has ever been. When successful governments or rules have finally found something that everyone likes and is content with, greed takes hold of those who rule or have power and then take from those lesser than. It is not capitalism itself that should condemned but that greed of humans in general. Christ wasn't like "hey so despite all the systems of government that have been set already in human history, there is this one called Capitalism that is going to be the absolute worst of them all."

Borlng as well

Yeah. Everyone here is missing the point.

@joe buffalo fam I watched this video a month ago and I'm too bored to watch it again so figure it out on your own. Sorry if I sounded rude.

You are communist, so that's why.

Tyler Solvestri 🥱

Yeah, amazing uses a government official to represent Capitalism when Capitalism doesn't really need government.

Yes!

definitely!!

Why would they do that if all they are doing is spreading beautiful and colorful propoganda? God forbid you'd fact check them.

@@davehedric1543 oh, could you enlight us on what their "propoganda" is?

@@alafolieee it's obvious that making a video about capitalism without mentioning colonialism, slavery (more than a tiny box about Adam Smith), Marx and his contributions to understanding how the system works, labor exploitation as a source/necessary for profit, imperialist wars, is propaganda lol.

They were dealing in usury, that was conveniently taken out in later doctrines.

@Giggler Later doctrines? A doctrine is a belief of a church. So you're saying a belief in and older church was removed from the beliefs of newer churches? That had better be what you were talking about because you desperately need to understand that we have literally thousands of articles from Hebrew and Greek that all still can be held in your hand to this day that all cross reference eachother and all were located in different areas. Even if that is what you meant you are still mistaken. Nothing has been removed from scripture. Jesus removed the money changers just as Derek said. This was also the action that set up the Crucifixion. Jesus was keeping all commandments...and it was given to Moses that the act of usury is illegal.

God was pissed at the interest rates...just saying.

But the point is not about "economical theory" but "why trade is something desecrating" which can be developed into "what is in trade, that is bad enough to be prohibited to the point that no other than son of god use force to remove it from temple?".

Or contradicts?

Wow. I also need help for my term paper about How global capitalism is connected with progress of Television. Or how television is related with capitalism?

yes this is a pretty shallow video, a rare occasion for the channel as they always seem to get things right otherwise

Alexander The Great spread the Greek culture of reason to mystical India. The resulting rationality may have guided the discovery of double-entry. Alexanders teacher was Aristotle, the discoverer of scientific method.